The mold reminds me of the Dunlop Turbo Plus and Turbo ProEmrik don't get enough praise. They seem to have aimed for quality products out of Taiwan from their Australian HQ. This subtly named Dictator looks like the usual 357g, 17mm beam offering, but the even balance gives it a very beefy swing. Incredibly solid and plush, like a Comfort Edge with a larger (90sqi ish) and thinner hoop.
Dead ringer! I was thinking the same thing.
I coveted the Turbo Pro when I saw it on the racks in 1983 or 1984. In the US, at the time, there was a discount chain/catalog store called Best. For whatever reason, Best carried some decent tennis racquets in their sporting goods inventory, and that year, among their highest end frames sold were the Taiwanese Dunlops… Black Max and Turbo Pro, for instance. I thought the Turbo Pro looked super cool and modern. However, when World Tennis Magazine tested one, their review was very lackluster.
i enjoy these interactions. Where people just love tennis I met someone while leaving the public courts. Grandparent with their grandchild. The elder was throwing tennis balls from across the net...no racquet. The child was missing and flailing but both seemed to have fun.
I’d give her a Secret 04 lol.
hold the phone, what on earth was the wilson Excalibur?
$600 in 1993!I posted the Wilson Excalibur advert previously. It came with an annual factory check-up support. You should probably buy if you see one for $5!
I believe I need to clean my glasses.
Played with a group of oldsters and one younger guy, just plinking around getting some exercise. Brought out the Pro Staff 4.0 and these were my first hits with it. Maybe I'll try doing some voiceover or if I get lazy I'll just put a text update for the 3 people who remotely care. used dual cameras, slomo, the whole shebang. Tennis rackets are so subjective I find it hard to think of things to say about how something hits that's not just total opinion, but I felt like this frame had decent control of its power. I felt like I could mostly keep things in the court, though I definitely shortened my backswing a bit. With this much power on tap it takes a bit more racket guidance than huge head speed.
I feel like I know how to swing to keep the ball in the court. I just feel like I don’t have high confidence in where it’s gonna land lol. Like I kept trying to hit the ball to the guy in the yellow shorts forehand since his backhand is pretty bad, and over and over again, I’d hit it to his backhand despite my efforts lol.
I guess I meant the ability to find the strings is easiest without framing and the fact that you don’t even have to hardly swing due to the stiffness. For precise redirection players sticks are the best for sure.
Great looking racquets, personally I would have gone for the Profile as that is what I am currently usingTonight Play it Again Sports I found these two. They look remarkably similar, I think they might actually be modified versions of the same mold, though I could tell the layup is not the same, the Profile is definitely heavier. It also has PWS and a thicker beam bridge from the throat to the bottom of the hoop. Also no mention of Kuebler anymore on the Pro Staff. Were these sold at the same time, around 1992ish? I assume this was the final version of the original Profile line? TCN buttcap code on the Profile, but the Pro Staff 4.0 was missing its buttcap trapdoor cover so idk what its code was, though it said Taiwan on the bottom. No case though. I must say, racket cases used to be so much nicer, that Profile case is THICK, and has this embossed foam lettering around the word 'Profile' (on the other side), just something we've totally lost in tennis today. You see the stock generic cases that come with Babolats now? Paper thin and not even branded for any particular frame.
I only bought the Pro Staff as it was $10 cheaper ($9.99) though it had no case. Maybe some of you remember how I was dissapointted in the Pro Staff 4.2, so lets try one that's even bigger, lighter, and stiffer. Surely it'll impress right? But I have some hope as I do actually enjoy swinging my Profile 2.7 95 from time to time.
The Pro Staff has certainly had a lot of vastly different looks over time, and this is definitely one of the wilder ones. Now I need a 5.5 Spin super thin beam for the ultimate contrast lol!
In store comparison pics, before cleanup efforts.
Studio stuff, a lot of the scuffs came right off with a magic eraser. Those work wonders for cleaning old frames.
Hammer line got its own unique hologram.
At half the price I found the Pro Staff More compelling. (Also I already have a Profile 2.7 in the 95 head). Also wanted to see how a 4.0 si dual taper beam stiffness index felt compared to 2.7 si. Verdict - about the same, still very stiff.
they’re great for drive volleys. At only 305g strung they’re a bit light though. Naturally head heavy because of the Hammer system.
Found this at Savers, which has really been coming in clutch in recent months. $3.99 for a Kneissl Spark 35 in 9/10 shape. 100sq in, 360g, and somewhat flexy despite the ceramic branding, it feels like it could be repainted and marketed as a modern players stick. Apparently they had to pay Prince for.... something. Thought people only had to do that for oversize frames? These come from Yamaha's factory in Singapore just as the Aeramic 25 did, but I like how this hits a lot better. I don't know if this was a higher end frame or not. My Kneissl knowledge is pretty sparse.
And while I was at it, might as well post about my latest Rawlings find. This 'Speed Hawk' is in fantastic shape. Maybe by speedy they mean aerodynamic? Or maybe flexible as I see no vulcanized fiber layer unlike the rest of the Rawlings I have. It does have a rather thin throat, but its width makes up for it, and it also has a fiber layer on top. Decided to also do a family photo with the rest of the Rawlings offerings. 3 out of 4 came from Japan, while the Newcombe Mark of a Pro came from Taiwan. Weight and balance wise 3/4 also are nearly identical with the static weight of the Hawk, Newcombe MoaP and Court King being 368, 368, and 370g respectively. The outlier being the feathery light 334g Newcombe Meteorite. You can really see where the Meteorite saves on weight by looking how thin it is at the throat in terms of width. I have hit with it though and its pretty good. I still haven't hit the the MoaP or the Speed Hawk which I just got yesterday.
L to R: Speed Hawk, MoaP, Court King, and Meteorite.
hoop layer comparison
The beam is far more boxy here than on the secrets. They’re definitely not the same. Although I think they might share identical plastic grip collars, both feature serial numbers stamped into them as well.
not sure...doesn't remind me of a prince product but it's just fr my limited experience. Maybe not so obvious as the pro kennex/babolat of the early pure drive
Honestly the connection to Yamaha is the main reason I like them. Though I’m quite certain they’re not direct clones of any specific Yamaha frame. The beam width and bevel of the Aeramic 25 is identical to the Yamaha Admic 25, but the balance, weight, and hoop shape is different.
LOVE looking at these old ad's. To think I still have a few of these frames..Pro Kennex Asymmetric, Slazenger Mystique 95 and MP95, Yonex RQ380, Dunlop Revelation 95
Hammer came out in 1990. It came in two names at first the Profile Hanmer and the Pro Staff Hammer. Then they simplified rhe name with Hammer 2.7 and 4.2.A couple of sites show Ocho XP is discontinued in the UK too.
I think this was the 1st Hammer launch advert from 1992:
The 4.2 was the same mold as the 6.1 si just different layup. Did you mean 4.0, and 4.5?
